Another lucrative source of equity firm revenue is management fees, essentially charges for the service of overseeing investments. Most equity firms levy a 2 percent annual charge on the assets they manage for clients, but Rauner has said the GTCR charge is 1.5 percent.

Service fees charged by most professionals, be they money managers or plumbers, are typically considered regular income and subject to taxation at the top of whatever tax bracket the individual qualifies for under the federal progressive tax system, tax experts said. In Rauner’s case, that was 35 percent through 2012.

At its core, the fee waiver strategy is an accounting maneuver that blurs the line between management fees charged by equity firms like GTCR to manage funds for investors and profits generated by the firms’ investments in the funds they manage.

In short, equity firms technically waive collecting on millions of dollars of management fees they are owed, but that hardly means they forgo the value of those fees. Instead, that gets reflected as a stake in the very investments they manage.

When the investment fund turns a profit, often within months, the equity firm receives the cash value of the waived fees and distributes that among its partners.

Doing so lowered his tax rate from 35 percent to 15 percent. The Tribune says the IRS is revisiting this loophole.

Complicated tax rules related to those business income losses freed Rauner from paying any Social Security or Medicare taxes in 2010 and 2011, despite his reporting healthy earnings in other income categories and listing a combined adjusted gross income for those years of about $55 million.

Uh-oh.

In 2010, Quinn whacked Bill Brady hard for not paying income taxes. This time it’ll be about Social Security and Medicare taxes.

Oh, please. Rauner made a gazillion times more than Quinn and his effective rate was two-tenths of a point higher and that’s burying the lede?

Pardon me while I LOL.

…Adding… From the Quinn campaign…

Following today’s front page Chicago Tribune report that Bruce Rauner “would not be releasing” his complete tax returns for the past three years, Quinn for Illinois Communications Director Brooke Anderson issued the below statement:

“Today we learned that Bruce Rauner again gamed the system to benefit himself while the rest of us play by a different set of rules.

“It took Chicago Tribune investigative reporters and a team of tax experts to unearth that Bruce Rauner, among the richest tax filers in America, has been using tax loopholes to avoid paying any Social Security tax and Medicare tax in 2010 and 2011.

“However, Rauner- who has not yet released any tax information from 2013 nor his complete return from previous years- told the Tribune he wouldn’t be releasing his complete tax returns to the public.

“Even Mitt Romney disclosed his complete tax returns to be transparent with voters.

“What is Bruce Rauner hiding?

“As a candidate for statewide office, Rauner has a duty to disclose his complete tax returns - including schedules -for the last three years, especially 2013.

“To not do so would be a total disservice to the people of Illinois.”

Today’s Tribune story reports that Rauner used elite tax strategies not available to everyday people to shield his wealth from paying his fair share in taxes. These particular tax strategies are under investigation by the IRS.

To date, Rauner hasn’t disclosed his complete tax returns for the last three years. In addition, he has not disclosed any tax information whatsoever for 2013.

I read through the entire article.
There is nothing illegal here.
The IRS scrutiny extends to all businesses. The IRS is not focusing exclusively or actively on Mr. Rauner.

The only danger will be in the political manipulation of this information. How his political opponents twist this data into presenting Mr. Rauner as some type of evil greedy beast, is what will happen.

But the fact is, anyone willing to spend the 30 minutes to carefully read through the Tribune’s story comes away from not gaining any new insights into Mr. Rauner, due to his reported taxes from the past three years. Why?

Because you would have to believe that Mr. Rauner spends his days doing his taxes personally. I don’t even do that. Mr. Rauner and his business partners have tax attorneys who do his taxes, presents their taxing options, and recommends how his taxes are handled. While Mr. Rauner and his business partners have the final saying, they do so relying upon professional tax accounts and attorneys.

Rauner does not do his taxes. To extrapolate any personal strengths or weaknesses based on these tax filings would be murky at best.

Additionally, Rauner’s tax rate is the same as Quinn’s. 19%. How he gets there is radically different from you or I. But it is completely legal, even if the IRS is reviewing how businesses such as his, meets their legal obligations.

The Tribune also mentions that the Federal Government’s taxing of money earned in the manner Mr. Rauner has earned his, was deliberate and intentional. There seems to be no deliberate misreading or stretching of tax definitions by Mr. Rauner’s tax accountants, staff and tax attorneys.

I would prefer a gubernatorial campaign based on the real issues facing Illinois. Not ginned up class warfare. But I bet that is asking too much.

Yeah, that’s going to bite him. However, I wouldn’t expect a good businessman to pay anymore in taxes than the law allows for. This is a real problem with the law, not a business or their tax firm being savvy.

BR: That’s exactly the point of my campaign. Corrupt politicians and union bosses always want more tax money to spend and waste. If you can legally pay less in taxes, that’s just fine. I will have a detailed plan on how you can pay less in taxes–that will come out later. Gotta go.

The nursing home abuse plaintiff or plaintiffs alleged that Rauner’s company created corporate loopholes that allow any involved companies to skirt or reduce liability.

Then there’s the Cardinal lawsuit, in which hundreds of employees sued Cardinal, a company onwed by GTCR, for being misclassified as independent contractors. The employees alleged that they were ripped off by a complex corporate scheme created to shift employer costs to them.

==Congress has been very good to the private equity types. No shock there. They may not favor a progressive income tax, but they sure do love the dodges that give them lower rates than Johnny Paycheck.==

In that instance, it reveals how little that business man understands politics.

What should he have done? Tell his tax attorneys and staffers to find a way to pay more than he is legally required to do in order to offset any a potential political attack in the future, if he should decide upon pursuing an elected public career?

I would be a whole lot more worried about a candidate’s personality if he did plan something like that. It would be some kind of obsession.

Even at 15% I paid more in income taxes than one half of one percent of the population. So I paid way more than the little people who wear Carhartt jackets to work. don’t forget that. I didn’t do the income tax returns anyway, my wife did. I just signed em. I was too busy fly fishin.

No wonder rauner is challenging the constitution and libertarian party petitions, by the time November rolls around he won’t be able to fool anyone into voting for him. At this rate he might not even be able to pay anyone to vote for him!

==Wanna know how I know you didn’t read the article?
Rauner paid a higher effective rate than avatar-of-the-people Pat Quinn.==

Actually, from the article: “Tax breaks, however, reduced his effective tax rate for those years to slightly more than 19 percent, about the same rate paid by Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn, whom Rauner is trying to unseat. Rauner’s combined federal tax bill was $20.7 million from 2010 through 2012. Quinn’s, according to his tax returns for those years, totaled about $106,600 on income of about $568,000, giving the governor an effective tax rate of 18.8 percent.”

1. Ordinary income or capital gain, it’s all taxed in Illinois at the same rate. The flat tax is actually one of the few things that this State gets right.
2. He certainly paid the maximum in Social Security tax, as the earnings cap was $110,100 in 2012
3. As to not paying the full amount of Medicare tax, if you don’t like the outcome, change the law. Don’t pillory a person who uses it to his advantage unless you’re willing to say you wouldn’t do the same.

OW- Today’s Quinnipiac polls hints that a majority of Americans believe Romney would be a better president than Obama.

Even if you don’t believe that hypothetical tripe, what it does hint at is being Mitt Romney isn’t the political curse it was a year ago.

Recognize that change, please. Recognize that things have changed over the past two years since Romney’s wealth was used as a cudgel against him. Recognize that running against Rauner as a mini-Mitt isn’t as potent an argument as it would have been two years ago.

In short, your Rauner/Romney attacks don’t carry the weight they used to. It seems that when you mention Romney, voters no longer seeing the Monopoly Man anymore. Worse, when you do - some voters, especially those whose party you claim to be a part of - would consider the comparison a plus.

==Actually, from the article: “Tax breaks, however, reduced his effective tax rate for those years to slightly more than 19 percent, about the same rate paid by Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn, whom Rauner is trying to unseat. Rauner’s combined federal tax bill was $20.7 million from 2010 through 2012. Quinn’s, according to his tax returns for those years, totaled about $106,600 on income of about $568,000, giving the governor an effective tax rate of 18.8 percent.”

Comprehension is part of reading.==

You’re right, comprehension IS part of reading. Such as comprehending that an effective tax rate of “slightly more than 19 percent” (Rauner) is greater than an effective tax rate of 18.8 percent (Quinn).

I’m pretty sure the Rauner people knew this was going to come out eventually and they will have the appropriate commercial response. I agree with the previous poster that it’s not 2010 and Quinn’s ineptness will trump all these hysterics come election day. No mention though in today’s postings on the Trib editorial on where Quinn was for the term limits and re-map amendments. Mr. Populist was and is strangely silent. Perceived power corrupts all. A little balance could be used in the reporting Capital Fax!

What works in cases like this is a campaign to show how all that wealth helped us. Rauner’s crew better have a whole bunch of nice PR crap that shows us how Rauner has spent his fortunes helping Illinoisans.

That is what I see helping them in a case like this.

Stop explaining and defending. Show us where Mr. Moneybags gave that money away and why we ought to love him. Change the debate.

Did Bruce break the law? If not then I find it disheartening that people get attacked for trying to minimize their tax burden. Everyone does it to some degree. But I guess when your income passes some unknown threshold it is apparently evil.

===Even if you don’t believe that hypothetical tripe, what it does hint at is being Mitt Romney isn’t the political curse it was a year ago.===

So, if I don’t believe it, why would I then believe the hint?

===Recognize that running against Rauner as a mini-Mitt isn’t as potent an argument as it would have been two years ago.===

Tell that to Rauner and his Crew, and the fact that every time they are all compared to Romney, they all throw a fit and point to a pristine Carhartt and a watch, lol.

It’s not me afraid of the comparison, it’s Bruce Rauner who is terrified.

===Worse, when you do - some voters, especially those whose party you claim to be a part of - would consider the comparison a plus.===

Where are you getting that being compared to Romney is a plus by Republicans? If a member of My Party thinks comparing a candidate favorably to Romney in a competitive race is a good thing in Illinois, they are delusional.

I am sure the next time Rauner talks to the press, he will embrace the Romney comparison.

Many similar processes are used by owners of small and big businesses, to convert what would ordinarily be considered earned income, into capital gains.

If I recall, Rauner disclosed paying more in total taxes than expected (at least by me) from someone at his earning level. I’d be more upset to find he and or GTCR transferred earnings offshore to evade taxation, a la Bain Capital and Romney.

Vanilla sums it up: who cares. Hypocrites, the lot of you. If you were a successful businessman, you would do the best to hold on to your money. I would. I wouldn’t cheat. I would take what the government gives me.

—
Rauner’s crew better have a whole bunch of nice PR crap that shows us how Rauner has spent his fortunes helping Illinoisans.
—

Except that gather a bunch of Illinoisans in a room and ask them if Rauner’s staggering wealth *helped* them — and how — and they’ll give you a blank look.

The only one benefitting from Rauner’s wealth is Rauner — despite attempts to downplay it. I’d have more respect for the guy if he dressed like he had enough money to buy a suit that fit. I’m very unimpressed by a rich guy pretending to be a “non-rich” guy by refusing to wear ties to events and wearing jackets that don’t quite fit and pretending like he’s some “man of the people”. The pretend stuff is worse than the reality of actually being wealthy, IMHO.

Rauner is straight out of an Elmore Leonard novel. He’s the rich guy that gets his because he doesn’t realize he’s nowhere near as smart as the folks he’s trying to con.

===Because you would have to believe that Mr. Rauner spends his days doing his taxes personally. I don’t even do that. Mr. Rauner and his business partners have tax attorneys who do his taxes, presents their taxing options, and recommends how his taxes are handled. While Mr. Rauner and his business partners have the final saying, they do so relying upon professional tax accounts and attorneys.===

==You’re right, comprehension IS part of reading. Such as comprehending that an effective tax rate of “slightly more than 19 percent” (Rauner) is greater than an effective tax rate of 18.8 percent (Quinn).==

And if you read the rest of the article, you find that, unlike Quinn, Rauner also did not pay any Social Security or Medicare taxes in 2010 or 2011, despite having a gross income of about $55 million those years. So, in other words, Quinn paid at a higher overall rate. Comprehension.

We all aspire to be more successful and when some achieve huge success, they are villified. BR apparently paid tens of millions in taxes. Romney paid tens of millions in taxes and was and is very generous with charitable giving.

====You’re right, comprehension IS part of reading. Such as comprehending that an effective tax rate of “slightly more than 19 percent” (Rauner) is greater than an effective tax rate of 18.8 percent (Quinn).==

And if you read the rest of the article, you find that, unlike Quinn, Rauner also did not pay any Social Security or Medicare taxes in 2010 or 2011, despite having a gross income of about $55 million those years. So, in other words, Quinn paid at a higher overall rate. Comprehension.==

Social Security and Medicare taxes paid are included in the calculation of the effective tax rate paid. Comprehension.

Some people say that Rauner gets the breaks that others would also try to get. That is correct in many cases. I have less of a problem with that than Rauner getting any advantage that he can, and any government help that he can, while slamming public union leaders and unions for doing the same or similar things.

Unions give to politicians, unions lobby and they negotiate for the best possible deals for their members. It’s the hypocrisy that bothers me most.

Maybe the US as a society benefits from all of its gazillionaires, like Rauner, and maybe it doesn’t. Depends on your point of view.

It is clear, however, that we the people know that our US tax system greatly favors the wealthy and, knowing that, we have done little about it.
Can’t blame it all on the Republicans, especially in Illinois, where the Party is pretty much extinct. So, where’s the progressive income tax?
Nowhere, that’s where.

Is Rauner doing anything that a similarly situated person wouldn’t do? Everyone - at least anyone with 1/2 a brain - always looks for legitimate ways to reduce their tax burden. While it may be great campaign fodder, the article clearly says the “…strategy is allowed under tax rules.”

@Westward: please be careful of your own high horse, when calling people “hypocrites.”.

I’ve been a successful businessman, and told my accountant not to do some tax-lessening schemes that appeared to me to be unethical and unpatriotic. Since when is protecting my money the moral imperative? I have known many earners in Rauner’s range who do not “take all the government gives me,” when it comes to some methods of tax avoidance at higher earning levels. Think about offshoring earnings, or hidden funds, to avoid US taxation of a US company, and you might come up with the same answer.

From what I know so far, Rauner’s approach on his taxes, doesn’t concern me.

No one said Mitt Broke The Law
THey said he was a tax minimizer
The best part of the story is that he cannot explain any part of his tax payments…zip…sero…nada
Question #1: “Mitt you grabbed a $600K for ag losses in ‘12. Pleaee tell us did that come beans, corn? Did it happen from the draught?

That answer would be a hoot
Of course “tax minimizer” seems to under review by the G

Stop trying to draw the comparison between ordinary people trying to lessen their tax rate and a Billionaire. The analogy is not apt. Most of us play within the rules, when your like Bruce who has been playing the inside game for a long time, you get to write the rules. Tax holes are because of people like him.

We are supposed to have a progressive system, Bruce’s tax rate should be almost twice what he actually pays. How do you think that happens? Insiders buying breaks through lobbying and donations. I don’t have that kind of power, and neither do you.

This issue resonates with people because they do have 1/2 a brain and can figure out how Wall St makes and takes advantage of purposeful tax loopholes. For every dollar Bruce didn’t pay, that is a dollar more to the deficit which our kids will one day pay.

Brady didn’t pay taxes because he had loss carry forwards. There shouldn’t be a reason to “spin” it, it is what the IRS allows.

I think pretty much everybody understood the toll taken on the housing industry in 2008-09-10. People take risks in small businesses and some times things happen. If you lose money, you don’t pay taxes.

==Social Security and Medicare taxes paid are included in the calculation of the effective tax rate paid.==

So Quinn paid income tax, Social Security and Medicare taxes like most of us do, while Rauner used loopholes most people can’t use to avoid paying a portion of those. Seems cheap and shady to me, but then I guess I’m just your average taxpayer paying the bills instead of weaseling out of paying for the Medicare I’ll use one day so I can buy another ranch or mansion. “Or, hey, how about that shiny governor’s office? I could use some of those Medicare taxes I avoided paying to buy that!”

It’s funny how the press and the public seem to feel they are entitled to tax returns for anyone running for public office. I don’t care how much or how little anyone makes and for that matter I don’t care if they used every legal “loophole” in the book as long as they pay what the IRS says they owe. As a homeowner I used my mortgage interest to reduce my taxes (yes, that’s a loophole). If a candidate didn’t use every available legal means to reduce their tax burden I think that they are either too stupid or too ignorant to be elected.

This will be Quinn’s best personal issue against Rauner. It’s not that he’s filthy rich, it’s that this elite club gets out of paying taxes even the lowest paid minimum wage worker contributes. Remember also all earned income of people making less than a certain amount is taxed, while income over that amount for the well off isn’t. Rauner didn’t even contribute that much.

Seems he did not pay SS taxes because his “income” was a net loss from business operations. Yes, he made millions but was able to use business losses to eliminate SS and Medicaid taxes. Certainly legal, but will cement in the mind on voters that he is not like us.

Cass-I hope the Rauner campaign takes your advice and treats this like a minor issue that Quinn cannot make hay out of. Voters may have no problem voting for the incredibly rich, but voting for the incredibly rich who have the ability to avoid paying taxes the rest of us do tends to stick in a lot of craws.

Rauner could have easily taken some of his compensation as salary, perhaps even just the FICA maximum taxed amount (ballpark $118,00ish) just to pay social security tax so he could prove that he is one of us, or that he believes in a society in which we are all in this somewhat together, at least in this one way. But no, no amount of tax avaoidance is too small for the $53 million man. He can’t be bothered to participate in our “social security” because he doesn’t need it, so screw the little people. Social Security works becuase we all pitch in. But not Rauner.

This is a real BIG problem for Rauner. Real big. How is he supposed to appeal to the masses when he refuses to contribbute to the one program the vast majority (the “masses”) of Americans rely on and support.

It’s not like he couldn’t afford the hit. The amount he avoided doesn’t even rise to the level of a rounding error to his net worth or income.

BR is about 56-57 years old. I’m sure he has paid plaenty to SS and Medicare over the years. Instead of looking at percentages, why don’t some of you look at the total in taxes he has paid.

I believe some poster mentioned he paid around $20 million in federal taxes for a 3 year period, and he likely paid more. If a poster on this board pays $50K in that 3 year period, it would take 400 commenters to equal what Rauner paid.

So sez: “Social Security and Medicare taxes paid are included in the calculation of the effective tax rate paid. Comprehension.”

That’s factually inaccurate, you might want to learn a little about the tax code, where dollars go and how rates are affected before opining.

Medicare and Social Security taxes are separate taxes imposed by the federal government and deposited into dedicated funds in order to cover the costs of those programs. They are both based on AGI, and are effectively a function of income taxes. They have no connection whatsoever to things like interest forward and capital gains.

The vast majority of Rauners “income” comes from interest, capital gains, and the like. These taxes do not trigger SS or Medicare. I haven’t looked at Rauner’s returns, but because of the “losses” that Rauner claimed - like on the ranch, which let’s face it, probably isn’t a working ranch but rather a 10th home - he was able to reduce his income to zero or less than zero. Because he was able to do that, he was able to avoid paying SS and Medicare, which is based on AGI. Therefore, not one dollar of the millions he paid in taxes in 2010 or 2011 went to the Medicare or SS dedicated funds, so Rauner did not contribute to the solvency of those programs, despite “earning” upwards of $55 million in those tax years.

AS far as I’m concerned, that’s an issue for a guy who banked literally millions in government bailout money.

Investment professionals who are permitted to pay 15 percent on their carried interest partnership income have the Democrats to thank for this outrageous benefit- The Dems had years when they controlled the WH and Congress to fix this but truth be told- Senator Chuck Schumer has been responsible for allowing this treatment to continue- Every time someone tries to fix this- Schumer who has received more campaign $$ the any other senator from the Private Equity folks- has blocked the effort- There is no rationale to allowing the carried interest to be taxed at preferential rates- Proponents argue that taxing the carried interest at regular rates would result in reduced investment but in reality the investors usually are tax exempt pension funds and the taxable investors would still be taxed at capital gain rates- It is only the general partners of the funds who are effected and they should be taxed at regular rates since this is payment for their services for running the funds- Republicans are not the ones standing in the way of fixing this- Dave Camp recently tried to resolve this inequity and got stomped on- Look it up- Schumer is the problem

All you need to know, a quote from Mr. “0.01%” Rauner himself: “Breaking apart all that detail is hard to do.”

The man can’t detail his alleged losses, losses that he incurred while still pocketing $55 million, he can’t detail much else about his taxes, and he can’t detail a single substantive policy prescription he would like to implement during a potential term as governor.

I own a small business and my accountant has advised me that the IRS and Illinois Department of Revenue expect business owners to take a “reasonable salary” annually. Otherwise many business owners could side-step their obligation to Social Security, Medicare, & Medicaid. This is not leadership to exempt one’s self from such payments at the very time one reports earnings of $55 million dollars. Bruce Rauner should be facing a trial rather than the voters this fall.

FortyFour- talk to any tax lawyer- Rauner is doing nothing improper- the Tax Code treats his GTCR income as a capital gain- The problem is with the IRS not Rauner- In fact there is a legitimate basis to argue that the problem could be unilaterally fixed by The Secretary of the Treasury- I guess President Obama doesn’t want to use his “pen and telephone” on this because the Dems receive lots of campaign money from the private equity and real estate industries- Most tax lawyers will tell you that the Treasury could elect to classify the “carried interest” as regular income without congressional action

Rauner is running for governor. Did he decide to do this on a whim, with no advance planning?

How is it going to sound when I see my elderly mother and her friends and tell them that Rauner paid nothing in the way of social security or medicare taxes in the last few years? I can predict their response, “He’s a millionnaire with all those houses and he paid nothing?”

It won’t matter to them that it’s legal. And they’ll be telling their friends at the senior center.

Really, Rauner can pump millions of his own dollars into his campaign, but doesn’t put anything into social security and medicare?

You can’t buy the kind of negative publicity this is going to get. Quinn must be a happpy guy today.

==So sez: “Social Security and Medicare taxes paid are included in the calculation of the effective tax rate paid. Comprehension.”

That’s factually inaccurate, you might want to learn a little about the tax code, where dollars go and how rates are affected before opining.

Medicare and Social Security taxes are separate taxes imposed by the federal government and deposited into dedicated funds in order to cover the costs of those programs. They are both based on AGI, and are effectively a function of income taxes. They have no connection whatsoever to things like interest forward and capital gains.==

Oy. Trying to be patient here.

I never said payroll taxes (social security and medicare) aren’t separate taxes. But they are included when you compute your EFFECTIVE, NOT MARGINAL, tax rate. Your effective tax rate is what you actually pay in taxes out of your income.

Without addressing the crazy and maniacal tax policy in place, it does occur to me that the Tribune phone lines must be jammed with guys posting here that are suddenly renewing their subscriptions. They’ve been cancelling them all year. lol.
So, are the Tribbies doing their job or not. Or just when you like what they say? #Irony.

Pardon me if I sound stupid, but I can more about our states economy and how it’s being run than I do tax rates. Our tax code is screwed up and favors the rich, but I don’t see a 50% plus one coalition of elected officials to fix it.

Sue, the carried-interest dodge is based on an IRS interpretation and rule of the Internal Revenue Code from the early 90s.

I know it’s been argued from both the left and the right that a president can order the IRS to interpret the law in a specific way, but I doubt if its wise. Better Congress and the president get together on a refinement of the law.

I never said payroll taxes (social security and medicare) aren’t separate taxes. But they are included when you compute your EFFECTIVE, NOT MARGINAL, tax rate. Your effective tax rate is what you actually pay in taxes out of your income.”

Yes, this is true.

Is it not *also* true that Pat Quinn–as a State Employee, covered by the State Pension–is *also* not paying FICA/Medicare taxes?

I brought up the “no laws were broken” defense on this very blog when people were being attacked for earning more than one government pension at the same time. And I’d bet the same people who are using the “no laws were broken” defense now are the ones slamming me for using it then.

For the record, I don’t think there’s anything morally wrong with what Rauner did here. But it’s politically moronic.

To Chi and the rest of you who find this tax treatment questionable on any level- contact Dick Durbin, Harry Reid and or Chuck Schumer- it could be changed tomorrow but the Dems have the same immoral love affair with big donors that the R’s have- The three of them seem to have had some sway getting the IRS to investigate conservative groups so I guess they could get the Treasury secretary to issue regs reclassifying the carried interest to be ordinary income

Chris above is incorrect. PQ is not a member of SERS, but GARS, whose members do not pay SS/Medicare.

I don’t have a dog in this race, but I think the Tribbies have stretched it a bit by saying that the fee waiver tax treatment is “under IRS scrutiny.” From what I read, a few attorneys in one department don’t like it. That’s it. Tell me I’m wrong, but I always thought you needed more to be “scrootened.”

How ironic-How much do you pay in SS and Medicare taxes on your interest and capital gains income. I hope you don’t prepare your own taxes. If you are upset with Rauner’s tax rate, I encourage you to contact Dick Durbin- he can fix it but then he wouldn’t be able to continue collecting all of his campaign contributions

Quinn campaign: demand more years of returns. No telling what hidden gems they may contain, or that Bruce will refuse to turn over. Either way you win. Keep pushing for details on the losses for those years that have been released.

@Sue - For Bruce Rauner to not have paid social security for the years 2010 & 2011 means he effectively had no “salary” or “paycheck” for those two years. He is basically implying that he was not employed those years in skipping out on his obligations to Social Security. Your citing carried interest and investment income is another matter entirely, which Congress needs to sort out. Mr. Rauner pushes the envelope too far when he claims to have no “reasonable salary” in 2010 and 2011. This is far worse in my opinion than what former Attorney General William Scott stood trial for and we need to make it clear to business owners that classifying everything as investment income without taking any “reasonable salary” is a crime, period.

http://www.irs.gov/Businesses/Small-Businesses-&-Self-Employed/Paying-Yourself
Reasonable compensation
Because an officer of a corporation is generally an employee with wages subject to withholding, corporate officers may question what is considered reasonable compensation for the efforts they contribute to conducting their trade or business. Wages paid to you as an officer of a corporation should generally be commensurate with your duties. Refer to “Employee’s Pay, Tests for Deducting Pay” in Publication 535, Business Expenses for more information. Public libraries may have reference sources that provide averages of compensation paid for various types of services. The Internal Revenue Service may determine that adjustments must be made to the income and expenses of tax returns for both the corporation and an individual shareholder if the officer is substantially underpaid for services provided.

The payroll tax avoidance is the tripwire here. It never really came up with Romney — I still honestly have no idea whether Romney paid them or not — but what did come up with Romney was an effective rate of around 13 percent — well below even Rauner’s too-low rate. And on its own it didn’t do that much. But it did interact with a broader “them-vs-us” narrative that Obama himself didn’t really do much with — left to surrogates — but that Quinn has made a career out of of.

Quinn has all kinds of opportunities for a populist campaign that he simply would not have had with Kirk Dillard other than possibly with some social issues. And he will use them. It will be close.